Man, I am sooooo glad to read this thread.  I have been reading loads of stuff too about forum activity, creative networks etc. making a difference to downloads.  Having made alot of sacrifices and worked my butt off to go on field trips, improve my techinical ability, build my portfolio, suffer the pain of rejections, edit keywords and titles, create links etc. etc. I was absolutely gutted to read that the files that have disappeared into the ether were perhaps not downloaded because I didn't spend enough time chatting in forums (hard to take when you spent most of your schooldays being told to stop talking and get on with your work  ).  Seriously, after last weeks nonesense from Mr Klein, this pulled my motivation to rock bottom.   This morning I was beginning to wonder if I'd been duped into thinking I was contributing to a photo agency when in fact it was a social networking site.  I felt 12 years old.  Now I know that my lack of downloads is just because my photos are crap!  And I'm absolutely delighted!  At least that's something I'll be happy to work on......

I am fairly new to stock photography and when I first started I tested the water with a few agencies uploading a handful of images to them all before concentrating on the one which worked best for me.  Things have worked out reasonably well with that agency and I was planning on going exclusive when possible.  In anticipation, I have been attempting to close accounts elsewhere.  You know whats coming next....

One agency just wont reply to my account cancellation requests.  Two others are insisting that despite a portfolio of only a handful of images, they will implement the clause stipulating that images must remain on their sites for 6 months.  With one agency the 6 month rule applies only when you request deletion of images.  So, effectively that means I cant go exclusive until September.  Extremely galling as the portfolios with those agencies are so small and have only produced one sale in the last 4 months.

As I say, my fault for not reading the small print, but does anyone have any advice? 

Thanks photojay.  Encouraging to know that someone is having success with a 350.  I was beginning to think the only way out was a mark III 1Ds! 

Clearly a problem with my processing so thanks so very much for the pointer sharply_done.  I do tend to process for my own tastes and even though I've resisted the saturation button and dropped it below interesting ( kidding, please dont have a go...), its obviously still too much, so thats really helpful.

So I'll push on and give it another go.  With that addressed, can anyone point out any  immediate changes observed once they became exclusive  i.e. in terms of downloads,sales,portfolio visibility,search results (i know download limits and commission increase).

Can anyone who became exclusive at iStock detail any obvious improvements as soon as they became exclusive?  Is it worth sticking at it?  After reaching acceptance of over 90% (which i largely put down to my new L series lens/5d combo), I am now finding almost everything is getting rejected.  Now, far be it from me to question the decisions.  I am happy to accept them all.  I'm not a quitter and am prepared to work extremely hard to put it right (as I have done through various iterations over many months), but sometimes I also stick with a lost cause too long and I really dont want to spend the next 6 months banging my head against a brick wall.  Is it time to call it a day?

i can't speak for smithmore, but my point isn't one which can be explained by inspector off days.  i am talking about a consistent drop in acceptance rate over a 3/4 week period.  that's a trend not a blip and its either because my photography skills have deteriorated or there is a change in the inspection process.  if the former, fine.  if the latter then that's f***ing about with peoples livelihoods.  i have bounced back many times from rejections and accept that if my images are not good enough then fine.  i like to think i am grown up about it and indeed am delighted to have learnt a huge amount from my rejections.  however, what is so frustrating is that with each batch of rejections i have gone away and worked hard to improve.  i have also invested in better kit to get better results.  i truly believe that the images i have been submitting in the past 3/4 weeks are significantly better quality - both from a composition and technical point of view - than earlier submissions.  so, to find your acceptance rate go down significantly is disappointing.  i am not suggesting there is anything sinister going on.  it could simply be that the the inspectors have been told to raise the bar (entirely feasible and consistent with a new business strategy which has identified the death of macrostock and the need to push istock ahead of the crowd) and only accept exceptional images in certain categories (interestingly i do find images in some of the less marketable categories seem more readily accepted).  fine.  but at least at some of the other agencies they are honest about that and dont try to shoe-horn the rejection into a vague category that leaves you wondering what . you have to do to get it right, or thinking you need to go spend $12k on a camera and lens in order to avoid an artifacting or 'center point of focus' rejection...... (or else just use a 12MP point and shoot and avoid taking images which include sea or painted wood or .....)  if so, it would be nice to know for sure if this is a permanent bar raise because i can't afford to play games.  the only way my recently rejected images can be improved is with a step up to the next level of kit and i certainly can't take a chance on that level of investment when earnings are so low.  ok though if you are already established and already have that kit.  for example, if you currently contribute to getty......

I had a series of 60 really nice images of Grecian urns all rejected.....

...apparently they contained artifacting 

i thank you.